Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mozilla 1.2.1 Released

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the lather-rinse-repeat dept.

I shouldn't be allowed to work before coffee- I posted this at like 8:20 and must've forgotten to click that all important 'Save' button. Hey, Everyone's favorite web browser besides Chimera has released version 1.2.1. The fix includes security patches so it probably wouldn't hurt to snag it if you're running it.

21 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. Glad to see... by Smelly+Jeffrey · · Score: 5, Interesting

    that mozilla is quick at fixing their software when problems arise. Too bad that the DHTML bug came up in the first place. But I say "good job moz" for their fast repairs.

    1. Re:Glad to see... by Havokmon · · Score: 5, Interesting
      that mozilla is quick at fixing their software when problems arise. Too bad that the DHTML bug came up in the first place. But I say "good job moz" for their fast repairs.

      Yeah, it almost seemed to big for them to miss. But when I was browsing the bug # referenced in Buzilla, it looks as if the patch for that issue and some other patches just didn't get committed for some reason.

      --
      "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
    2. Re:Glad to see... by greechneb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have to agree. I've been using the nightly builds of 1.3a for about 3 weeks or so, and they are as reliable as IE6 SP1 is. I won't make any comments about what that implies though...

      anyway, good job mozilla team, and keep up the great work!

  2. DTML... by peterprior · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just for my own reference, examples of sites which died with the DHTML bug? Do lots of sites use DHTML? What the hell _IS_ DHTML ? :)

  3. Why so much bigger than 1.2? by CodeWheeney · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Looking at the release notes shows that the only change from 1.2.1 to 1.2 is the fix for the DHTML bug, but the installation images (Win32) went from 10.81 MB (11,339,472 bytes) to 10.95 MB (11,491,024 bytes). Anyone know why it got so much bigger? Was the fix that involved?

    --
    C8H10N4O2 | Developer > Code
  4. Threaded e-mail, wouldn't that be handy? by abischof · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Mozilla is a threaded e-mail client, eh? So far, so good. However, it doesn't actually remember the Expand All Threads state.

    So, suppose that you turn on threading and tell Mozilla to Expand All Threads. You now have a nice tree-like view of mail threads :). But, next time you load Mozilla, it'll be back to compressed view again (but still sorted by threads). If threaded mail sounds useful to you, you may want to vote for the bug (of course, you'll need a free Bugzilla account to vote).

    --

    Alex Bischoff
    HTML/CSS coder for hire

  5. Re:Chimera?! by teamhasnoi · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I run Chimera at work and Phoenix at home, and I have never been happier with two browsers! Tabbed browsing at home and work that uses the same commands? Rules. Speed? way over Mozilla and IE.

    Now if I could just download OS X for x86.

  6. Annoyance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I get really annoyed every time I install a new version of mozilla. Perhaps I'm doing it wrong somehow, but every time I upgrade all my plugins disappear. The first page I have to visit after an upgrade is optimoz.mozdev.org to get my mouse gestures back.

    Is there some way to preserve these plugins that I don't know about?

    And why oh why do I have to be root to install mouse-gestures under linux?

  7. Where's the tarball?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I usually download the source rpm for Redhat, but since I still run 7.3, and the current srpms are for 8.0, they didn't compile.

    With most projects, the tgz'd (or bz2'd) source file is in plain site, but I can never seem to find the one for Mozilla. Sure, I can extract it from the SRPM, but I want the real deal. And please, no "real men use CVS" comments, okay?

    (Posting as AC, as I feel lame for having to ask this quesiton.)

  8. Ack my Themes! by blonde+rser · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "Themes are Mozilla version-dependent; thus, themes created for Mozilla version 1.x will not install on Mozilla version 1.2, and above. The same is true with using version 1.2 Mozilla themes on earlier versions of Mozilla."


    has this always been true or is this new to 1.2... I don't remember my themes not working before but it may just be my memory that's not working
    1. Re:Ack my Themes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      >Is it so hard to make them that hardly anyone's doing it?

      No, I just think developers would rather wait until they can be assured their theme will work for more than a month.

      Imagine if the basic C language changed every month. It'd be as popular is intercal.

    2. Re:Ack my Themes! by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For Version numbers (1.0 1.2, etc) I think this has always been true.

      This time the upgrade really sucked... I was running Mozilla 1.0.1, upgraded to 1.2 and everything worked.

      Then I installed 1.2.1, and couldn't get mozilla to load. Uninstalled, deleted the c:\program files\mozilla.org, reinstalled, but Moz still frezes on install...

      By reading other comments, it's probably still the themes that freeze Mozilla upon load. I need to find and remove some registry setting somewhere...

      Now I'm back to 1.0.1, and it all seems to work just fine. Think I'll hold off on 1.2.1 for a bit...

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  9. So if there's just been one bug fix... by yoz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... how come I now can't have both my mail and browser windows open at the same time? Worked fine in 1.2 final. Now the mozilla process won't even die when I close all the windows (well, all one of the windows, since now, in an obvious bid to Highlander fans, there can be only one).

    Let me demonstrate where I am with Mozilla:

    start of tether [----------------|--] end of tether

    Don't tell me to bug it, I've already filed loads of bugs (very few of which have even been looked at, let alone fixed), and I haven't the time. 1.1 kept crashing on me, the 1.2 beta was worse, and you can forget about using the nightlies if you don't want to hit completely random regressions every other minute.

    No, I know I'm not paying for it, and I know it's a community effort, whatever. Let me just have five minutes of rage. (Actually, let me have the original 1.2 final installer back, because at least that one seemed to work, and minor DHTML bugs are something I'll put up with if they let me read the web and my mail at the same time)

    -- Yoz

    1. Re:So if there's just been one bug fix... by yoz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Thanks for the advice! I did a complete uninstall and reinstall, no luck. Then I moved my profile dir elsewhere, and then it worked fine.

      So now, being faced with having to rebuild my profile from scratch, I wasn't entirely happy, so I took a different route: Backed up my profile and thought about what I could delete that would solve the problem fastest while still keeping the majority of my data and preferences.

      Most obvious was registry.dat, but it's over a meg and I probably have lots of important stuff in there. So after some looking around, I killed chrome/chrome.rdf.

      Bingo! Works fine now.

      How odd.

      Still not entirely happy about the experience, but, as you suggested, I've been trying nightlies so that may have introduced the cruft. (I've a sneaky feeling it may have been the Orbit skin, though, in which case that's a nasty bug)

      -- Yoz

  10. From the horse's mouth by aWalrus · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From CmdrTaco's journal:


    Icing on the mornings cake: I got up on time, drove to work, posted a story, and then forgot to press *save* on the goddamn web form. So for hte next 2 hours I keep deleting submission after submission about Mozilla 1.2.1 thinking "geezus, are people blind?" and not realizing that no, I am in fact stupid. Of course, why so many people submit a bug fix release of a web browser is beyond me. Some stories I'd rather not post, but sheer volume of submissions really makes it impractical to ignore them
    --

    --
    Overcaffeinated. Angry geeks.
  11. Moz 1.2.1 Destroys Palm User Accounts by Admiral+Mouse · · Score: 2, Interesting

    BEWARE---Installing 1.2.1 can destroy your Palm user account.

    Aside from that, Palm address book sync is in... but there still seems to be lots of issues with it. Categores don't seem to sync well, it resets the "Show in list" field every time something changes, secondary address books don't always sync, etc.
    Classify as Not Yet Ready for Prime Time(tm).

    --
    Life if possible, art at any cost.
  12. What a difference a character makes by endico · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You'll be amused to know that Mozilla 1.2.1 differs from Mozilla 1.2 by one character.

    Ok, not exactly. It actually differs by 34 characters. The bug fix itself was a one character change (changed a '9' to an '8'). Changing the version string in various places from "1.2" to "1.2.1" took 33 characters.

    1. Re:What a difference a character makes by nule.org · · Score: 2, Interesting
      s/1.2/1.2.1/g can't take 33 characters, it's an integer change involving an even number of characters.



      Just thought I'd be annoying. :)

  13. Standards are important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If I wrote a C program and started it as

    void main(void, void)
    it is perfectly permissible for the compiler to complain. This is almost as bad as writing
    struct person {char * name; time_t date_of_birth; colour_type eye_colour; long double height; long double mass; int google_pages;}
    main(struct quaternion {long double real, i,j,k;} argc, struct train_schedule {unsigned int stations; struct stationtime {struct station {char * name; long double longitude, latitude;} station; time_t due_intime, due_outtime;} * station_list; unsigned int carriages; struct carriage {int first_seats, second_seats,third_seats;} * carriage_list;} ** argv)
    which is clearly absurd (even with a previous typedef colour_type uint32_t, even with time.h and stdint.h included and even if there isn't a syntax error somewhere).

    If web designers insist on writing web pages which either do not conform to standards or which misuse deprecated elements (such as <font face="symbol">&yen;</font> (or with an absolute code) for &infin; (Slashdot won't display certain characters, so I've had to literalise them to prevent them being stripped out completely) when many systems don't have a Microsoft symbol font - I see this problem far too often (although that site does warn users)), they should expect their page to fail somewhere.

    Of course, the DHTML bug is bad because with it, Mozilla 1.2 is not a conforming implementation of the HTML 4.0 standard and so no company will dare use it (just as few companies (excluding Microsoft) will dare use GCC (any version) due to lack of C99 support.

    And you forget the most important problem of Microsoft Internet Explorer - it does not work at all on any Unix system (the Solaris and HP/UX versions have been withdrawn), on any GNU system or indeed on almost all operating systems. Mozilla has the virtue of being somewhat more portable (for example, ports to BeOS and OpenVMS are in the pipeline).

  14. Mildly Disappointed In Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I finally went to the trouble to downloading the tarball, building and installing Mozilla just this last Sunday. (A Ghod-awful download time, 3+ hours to build, and make install took longer than most packages take to freekin' build!</rant>) While I must admit it looks pretty slick and has some nice features (tabbed browsing and the side-bar are two of my favourites), it's got some serious issues that're going to keep NS 4.79 my browser-of-choice for a while, yet. For one thing: font rendering is very poor compared to NS 4.79. And what's up with Moz' menus? I click on Appearance and then, say, Fonts and the thing just sits there thinking about it for a bit before the config window changes. The menus are mostly all like that. Additionally: while I know my bookmarks file has gotten way out of control: Moz takes much longer to deal with it than NS 4.79 does. Gecko's vaunted rendering engine really doesn't seem to be all that much faster than what NS 4.79 does. And what's up with Moz and 8-bit displays? Rendering looks like crap (sorry, but it does).

    So I'll continue using NS 4.79 for my average, daily needs. I'll use Moz for checking my own web work (particularly for what CSS stuff does) and for those rare sites that don't work (correctly) with NS 4.79.

    And wait for a stable release of the browser-previously-known-as-Phoenix. Maybe at least the performance issues will be addressed.

  15. My 2 big gripes about Mozilla by vasqzr · · Score: 3, Interesting


    1 - Tabbed browsing is cool, but you should get a confirmation that you'd like to close the main browser window when you have 23 tabs open

    2 - CTRL-SHIFT-L to open a web address. Make it CTRL-O.